Minutes

MINUTES SPRINGDALE JOINT PLAN COMMISSION AND TOWN BOARD MONDAY June 23rd, 2025 at 7pm Approved July 28, 2025 1. 7pm Call to order and certification of compliance with open meetings law. Present: PC Chair Jester, Bunn, Hanson, Carrico, Dorn, Sullivan, Aburomia. TB Chair Rosenbaum, Supervisors Schwenn and Altschul. PC welcomed new member Kirsten Dorn who is filling the seat vacated by Kelly Altschul, who was elected as a town supervisor. 2. MOTION [Jester/Bunn]: to approve minutes from June 2, 2025 PC meeting. 5-ayes, 0- nays, 2 abstentions (due to not attending previous meeting). MOTION CARRIED. 3. M. and K. Rainiero/ 2735 Bruner Ln/ 54x40x18 ft Residential Accessory Building/ Sec 10. MOTION [Jester/Hanson]: to recommend to the TB approval of a 54x40x18ft residential accessory building at 2735 Bruner Ln. This building is not for commercial uses (ag/personal only) Background: Mike and Kelly, the residents of Lot 1 Bruner Rd, requested an accessory building for personal and agricultural uses. Jester visited the site. No members of the public had any comments or concerns. 7-ayes, 0-nays. MOTION CARRIED. 4. DNR/Mount Vernon Hills/ Lot Line Adjustment/ Hwy 92/ Sec 34. MOTION [Bunn/Sullivan]: to recommend to the town board that the proposed lot line adjustment of approx. 1.26 ac between Mount Vernon hills LLC and the DNR is consistent with our lot line adjustment ordinance. 6-ayes, 0-nays, 1 – abstain (Carrico – due to employment with DNR). MOTION CARRIED Background/Discussion: The lands owned by Mount Vernon Hills include two parcels with small bits of land on the south side of State Rd 92 that abut DNR land. The DNR wishes to acquire the land via lot line adjustment. The PC reviewed maps indicating the areas under consideration and the list of prohibited lot line adjustments from the town ordinance. After reviewing the list of prohibited lot line adjustments, PC members voiced no concerns. There were no members of the public with comments. The lot line adjustment was seen as consistent with the goals of the Town Land Use Plan. 5. J. Hamilton/Lands off County Highway J/CSM consistent with concept plan /Rezone 7.95 ac from AT35 to RR4 for Residential Use/ Sec. 12. MOTION 1[Jester/Sullivan]: to recommend to the TB that the CSM as presented is consistent with the concept plan on file with the town. Per the concept plan, this lot is subject to a town approved building envelope. 7-ayes, 0-nays. MOTION CARRIED MOTION 2 [Sullivan/Jester]: to recommend to the TB the rezone of 7.95 ac from AT35 to RR4. Per the town of Springdale land use plan this lot will not be eligible for further division 7-ayes, 0-naps. MOTION CARRIED Background/Discussion: Freitag's (former owners) had a concept plan approved in 2014 – it was revised in 2018. The concept plan was an option 1 concept plan. Freitag's created the CSM lots on the corner of PD and sold the remaining farmland, farmhouse and 2 remaining density units to Hamilton. Hamilton has since added an ag accessory building to the property but has not developed any of the lots or replaced the razed original farmhouse. The PC noted that there is a building envelope on file for this lot. The lot lines were not delineated on this concept plan, and the proposed CSM does follow a fence line. The CSM also left a corner off the lot to serve as a connection between the lands containing farm fields since one of the remaining density units (either 5 or 6) will stay with the land if/when the other is divided off as its own lot. PC members noted that the proposed ownership of the driveway by this CSM will necessitate an easement for access to the other building envelope and probably an upgrade to the driveway. Because of the division of the land, the lot needs to be rezoned to one that is appropriate for residential use. The rural residential zoning district is appropriate for lots between 4-8 ac. This lot must be restricted from further division per the town of Springdale land use plan. There was no public comment regarding this agenda item. 6. Bilse Family LLC/ Lands on Lunde Lane/ Building Envelope Change/ Sec 17. MOTION [Jester/Sullivan] : to recommend to the town board approval of the building envelope changes as presented to the plan commission on June 23, 2025 with the conditions that the tree line on Lunde Rd remain or be replaced with similar trees AND that the house for the middle building envelope be restricted to a ranch/single story house so as to limit the view from public roadways. Background: Last month Bilse’s came to the town with a request to move building envelopes on a 2004 option 2 concept plan – the request moved the two most northmost building envelopes to the highest points on their proposed lots and moved the other closer to the road with its own driveway. There was much discussion about whether these changes met an option 2 constraints. There was much back and forth, suggestions and alternatives offered. In the end, we voted to have a site visit to get an updated view of the land and tabled the matter. A site visit was conducted: Rosenbaum, Jester, Bunn, Aburomia, and Sullivan were present along with members of the Bilse family Former TB supervisor Hefty and a neighbor. After hearing a lot of input / ideas at the town meeting. The Bilse family presented a revised building envelope layout for possible discussion during the visit. After the site visit, the family submitted another revised layout for consideration at the present meeting. Discussion: Bunn noted that the family had requested these building envelopes originally in 2004 and that the PC didn’t like them then. The approved building envelopes as approved best meet the goals of an option 2. Aburomia noted that that this change of building envelopes did not improve the previous concept plan or better meet the goals of an option 2 – it did not cluster the lots and the lot lines still broke up a lot of the ag land. The new envelopes he noted would be more visible to the surrounding countryside than the previous plan. Jester noted: the building envelopes are as clustered as the original concept plan and that rather than looking at the area under consideration at the moment that we need to look at this as a development area on a much larger parcel and that many acres of farmland were preserved on other parts of this concept plan. Sullivan noted that the new building envelopes were no better or worse than the original – potentially it decreases the amount of driveway. Roll call vote: Sullivan- aye, Bunn-nay, Hanson-aye, Jester-aye, Carrico-aye, Dorn-abstain due to just joining the board and not attending site visit or previous discussions, Rami-nay. 4-ayes, 2- nays, 1- abstain. MOTION CARRIED. JOINT MEETING OF THE TB FOR THE PURPOSES OF REVIEWING AND ACTING ON AGENDA ITEM(S) ABOVE. 8:15pm Rosenbaum called to Order the TB portion of the meeting MOTION [Altschul/Schwenn] to approve the TB portion of the joint minutes. 3-ayes, 0-nays. MOTION CARRIED • M. and K. Rainiero/ 2735 Bruner Ln/ 54x40x18 ft Residential Accessory Building/ Sec 10. MOTION [Altschul/Schwenn]: to approve the 54x40x18ft residential accessory building at 2735 Bruner Ln. This building is not for commercial uses (ag/personal only) 3-ayes, 0-nays. MOTION CARRIED. • DNR/Mount Vernon Hills/ Lot Line Adjustment/ Hwy 92/ Sec 34. MOTION [Rosenbaum/Schwenn]: to approve the proposed lot line adjustment of approx. 1.26 ac between Mount Vernon hills LLC and the DNR is consistent with our lot line adjustment ordinance and land use plan. 3-ayes, 0-nays. MOTION CARRIED • J. Hamilton/Lands off County Highway J/CSM consistent with concept plan /Rezone 7.95 ac from AT35 to RR4 for Residential Use/ Sec. 12. MOTION 1[Altschul/Schwenn]: to approve the CSM as presented as it is consistent with the concept plan on file with the town. Per the concept plan, this lot is subject to a town approved building envelope. 3-ayes, 0-nays. MOTION CARRIED MOTION 2 [Rosenbaum/Altschul]: to approve rezone of 7.95 ac from AT35 to RR4. Per the town of Springdale land use plan this lot will not be eligible for further division 3-ayes, 0-nays. MOTION CARRIED • Bilse Family LLC/ Lands on Lunde Lane/ Building Envelope Change/ Sec 17. MOTION [Rosenbaum/Altschul] : to table the item until the PC has the opportunity to hold a public hearing for the proposed building envelope changes. 2-aye, 1-abstain (Schwenn) MOTION CARRIED. Discussion: Schwenn did not see any issues with the proposed building envelope changes. Rosenbaum noted that while these lots are not how we would lay them out now, the concept plan existed. But the middle building envelope is the one that is the most concerning. Altschul likes that in the original locations that you would not see the houses and believes that moving the houses closer to the road is strip development. During the discussion a point of order was called by audience member Wayne Hefty who noted that the open meeting notice for this agenda item did not include the words “Public Hearing”. And that for a building envelope change that a public hearing must be held by the PC prior to the town board voting on a PC recommendation. PC Chair Jester confirmed that while abutting neighbors were notified of the meeting and that we opened the agenda item up to public comment that Wayne was correct these words were not on the agenda. As a result, the TB decided to table the item. The TB and PC and Bilse family agreed to hold a special meeting prior to the next TB meeting on July 15th at 6:30pm. MOTION [Schwenn/ Altschul]: to adjourn ______________________________ 7. R. Hoffman/ 2608 White Crossing / Concept Plan/ Sec 13. REQUEST: to approve the option 1 concept plan for the Hoffman lands as presented in the sides for June 2025. The Hoffman’s withdrew the request for a PC vote for this meeting and instead we held a discussion about the concept plan. They will re-submit a concept plan for review when they are ready to have it considered. Discussion: A site visit was conducted at the Hoffman lands on Feb 8th. Rosenbaum, Altschul, Jester, Hanson, and Aburomia Background” Hoffman wishes to dividethe original farm buildings from the rest of his land. This land does not have a concept plan on file and before we can divide land or create any lots, we must create a concept plan. When establishing how many density units a landowner is eligible for, we look at the acres owned as of the plan adoption date in 2002 exclusive of Right of Way (ROW) Records for acres owned (exclusive of ROW) by Robert as the plan adoption date are 75.780. The town considers lands divided by a road to be contiguous. - when I look at the parcel numbers of the lands that went into the 75 acre total in my table, they include 2- 20 ac and parcels on the west side of white crossing (actually on gust). Per the town land use plan an option 1 land division (which this would need to be since it is almost entirely farmland). This property would be eligible for 3 density units/divisions. Like many properties in Springdale, the land is unique. This property it is divided by a lot of roads, creating natural divisions. This landowner is asking for one density unit in each of the already naturally divided areas – one in the least productive part of the 40-ac field 40-ac in the wooded clearing west of white crossing and one tucked back off the field in the land surrounding the farmhouse lot. This is an option 1. 8. PC Business – PC Training scheduled for July 21st at 6pm/ PC Work Session scheduled for Aug 18th at 6pm 9. MOTION [Hanson/ Sullivan] to Adjourn Submitted by A Jester, Chair Town of Springdale Plan Commission